Isn't it strange how a GOVERNMENT sponsored report can suddenly become part of a fictional project fear.

No stranger than US plans to invade Canada(War plan Red) Governments plan for all kinds of contingencies. Only remainiacs regard the most extreme and unlikely scenarios as holy writ. The rest of us get a little tired of endless permutations of the sky is falling. Just as well gullibility is not contagious, or requires incarceration. No doubt they also think coronation street is a documentary.

So the idea we trade on WTO rules may collapse. The main reason we have to have the same tariffs for all countries is it is a consequence of WTO rules. But if we chose to breach those rules, it is not clear what could be done to prevent us. Sanctions of various kinds, certainly, but if the US and some other countries were prepared to ignore such sanctions they might not hold. The consequences for the world as everything collapses into a free-for-all on trade would be incalculable. But that would not dissuade Trump and probably not Cummings.

Not to mention Trump would be very happy for the UK to take the initial flak rather than the US.

So here's where we are. After three years and two months of sterile Tory failure, we have two months to go with politicians everywhere on summer holiday. Merkel sez backstop stays, end of. Macron sez backstop stays, end of. Johnson sez no deal with backstop. No backstop means almost certain border conflicts. Every economist worth their salt sez that brexit will be a disaster. There is no chance whatsoever of a trade deal with the US if we crash out without a deal leading to hard border, no backstop.

It is hardly mocking napoleon macron to point out that his railways run predominantly on track from sunny Scunny's rolling mills(The industrial garden city.) This is a fact!

The contract was initially with British steel, then Cora and now Tata, and has been in existence since 1999. Up until the early 80s iron ore was mined locally mainly opencast and extracted up to nearly 5,000,000 tons a year. The last operating quarry the yarborough is named after the local landowner who has an estate nearby of only 113 square kilometers, or 27k acres)

Boris is meeting Macron today. I would suggest he offers him a long vacation to St. Helena, then we can focus on the important work of Brexit. and Merkel has to face the fact that fears of a German recession are rising after Europe's biggest economy posted its second-lowest manufacturing readout in six years. Wont be helped by all those German cars not coming to Britain if they continue their silly games. Ireland is finally waking up to the fact that playing the EU's useful idiot has consequences.

Ireland has urged businesses to review supply chains and their strategies for dealing with UK markets. Firms should monitor possible drastic changes to transport, logistics, certification, regulation, licensing, contracts and data management ahead of Britain’s scheduled departure. The warning comes as firms are businesses are asked to monitor their cash flows, currency and make sure banking affairs are in order.

The Common EU Agricultural policy." Oxfam, not exactly famed for its opposition to government spending, calculated in 2006 that a British household had to pay an additional £832 a year for food because of CAP (it should be noted that another study for eastern and southern European countries that just entered the EU found a smaller inflationary effect on consumer prices). Most hit are, of course, low-income households, where higher prices on day-to-day goods have the greatest effect on their overall means. This is the same scheme that created the milk lakes and butter mountains and still exports at a loss to Africa to undercut and destroy local farm enterprises

Worse still, Brussels’ protectionism seems to explicitly favour big business over small and medium-sized farmers. The Heinrich-Böll Foundation, a think tank associated with the German Green Party, found that between 2003 and 2013, over 25% of farms in Europe went out of business. And indeed, it is mostly small farms that vanish, while bigger corporations get even bigger.

When it was established in 1962 the original purpose of CAP was to secure that there was enough food for Europeans on a continent that was still wrought from war. By the 1980s, CAP accounted for over two-thirds of the entire EU budget.

While the share of the overall budget has since gone down – to 38% under the current six-year budget – it is still the largest financial program of the union. In addition, despite having decreased in relative terms, CAP payments still increased in absolute numbers until 2013.

At 38% of the budget, European taxpayers send more than €58bn to farmers each year – a shocking amount if one considers that farmers only make up 3% of the EU’s total population and are responsible for no more than 6% of its GDP.

Indeed, while the original goal of CAP was to enable farmers to feed Europe after decades of conflict, now it’s Europe that is feeding farmers through its massive subsidies. Their businesses often only survive because they are effectively bailed out – unlike big financial institutions, these are not one-off bailouts, but day in, day out. If all of this sounds like protectionism and an illiberal economic policy it’s because that’s exactly what it is. That much was also clear from the strongly expressed opposition to a recent free trade agreement with Latin American countries from French President Emmanuel Macron and his colleagues from Ireland, Belgium, and Poland – all countries where farmers are profiting much from CAP. Politicians across Europe are fond of telling us that farmers need “protection” from the scourge of cheap imports, as if consumers’ interest in cheaper food were of no consequence at all.

An example of the madness: Richard Findlay is a farmer in the North York Moors National Park between York and Newcastle. As the Financial Times reported last year, Mr Findlay garners a profit of around £12,000 a year by grazing some seven hundred sheep. But even that £12,000 is quite a lot if one looks closer. Indeed, if it weren’t for subsidies delivered by the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), Mr Findlay would be facing a loss of £32,000. Simply put, this farm would not exist if it were not for Brussels."

Please furnish attribution for any information you copy-paste. -Joe Offer-

The Boris bounce versus the compo corpse. Spiffing news from the last survey results: Boris has taken a lead of 14 points over Labour in a new Kantar TNS poll, with the party jumping by 17% since May. What a lad! You can read all about it on Guido's site, the font of truth and editorial accuracy

"For all your (collectively) dire prognostications we may not know anything before Sept 1" Damn - I thought the leaked report came from the Government !!!

No responsible government can - or has ever tried to adopt a 'wait and see" policy, vertainly not on this scale The dfact that supporters of Brexit constantly put this up as an argument is confirmation enough that this "keep 'em all out" enterprise hs been a massive leap in the dark from day one Crazier and crazier by the minute Jim Carroll

Interesting that we are still being told the news is as likely to be good as bad. In over 3 years of asking for good news there has been no response. How is the news as likely to be good going off that track record? And, yes, this is now back to brexit.

Well I just nipped out to the shops and it all kicked off. Leading questions with implicit accusations are, to me, an attack. Not a million miles from "Are you still beating your wife?" or, put to UK lefties, "are you all still anti-Semites?"

In your posting

Date: 21 Aug 19 - 03:32 AM

Check which word was emboldened.

Incidentally, I'm not a member of any political party. As for Brexit, we are in a state of 'wait and see'. For all your (collectively) dire prognostications we may not know anything before Sept 1. And it is just as likely to be good news as it is to be bad news.

Within 10/15 years the East Wind had ripped away all the topsoil, making a once rich agricultural area into the holidaymaker-reliant desert it has become and devastating the lives of the people living there

Bit of an exaggeration I would say. The pedological literature does not support such an extreme view, even that relating to north Norfolk. In the last forty years a lot more has been learnt about soils,their erosion and means of mitigating it. In tandem, legislation on watercourses has forced additional remedial measures on landowners. Far more attention is paid to cultivation techniques on slopes. Techniques such as over sowing with a cross slot drill enable seeds to be inserted through an existing cover crop. Soil erosion occurs naturally through mass wasting and has been accentuated ever since man first started farming. Growing crops comes at a price. Not growing crops comes at a price. You starve. What choice are you going to make?

Forward the Brexit Brigade!’ Was there a man dismay'd? Not tho' the leaver knew Boris had blunder'd: Theirs not to make reply, Theirs not to reason why, Theirs but to do AND die, Into the valley of Death Rode the seventeen million Taking the rest of us poor sods with 'em...

Brexiteers have stopped having good days, Dave. Have you noticed how all their optimism about super duper trade deals and how the little UK is going to kick world ass once we're out has somehow seeped away? Do or die? Do AND die I think the poet actually said...

As to your comment "It happens a lot on this forum from the UK lefties." I shall let that stand but if you believe it is in any way the adult line of reasoning you seem to be advocating then I can assure you, you are wrong.

Dave the Gnome wrote: "Or do you, as many of your party do, believe that maintaining the countryside is more desirable than helping people?"

This makes your attack an attack on me. If I believed "maintaining the countryside is more desirable than helping people" that would make me appear inhumane and my opinions could be rejected because of my monstrous nature.

It's not that I object to such an attack because it is, or could be in any way, effective. I object to it because it's childish. It happens a lot on this forum from the UK lefties.

"You say this and that means you think that and therefor you are a monster!"

Dave the Gnome wrote: And is that not also the case with, say, the steel industry Stanron? If they maintain the population in a way the government seems desirable, then supporting them makes sense and they can be considered viable. Or do you, as many of your party do, believe that maintaining the countryside is more desirable than helping people?

Why do you personalise this stuff? It's nothing to do with belief or doctrine. Mine or anyone else's. It's actually to do with rules. EU rules say that it is unfair for one country to support it's industries above a certain level.

So I do think it's a good idea to support the steel industry workers. The EU rules against it. That is one, among many, of the reasons I think we should leave.

Other EU countries break these rules apparently without penalty. However the UK is a gross contributor to the EU budget. We are a cash cow to be milked. If we broke the rules we would be fined heavily, because we can afford to pay. That is another, among many, of the reasons I think we should leave.

"Surely if farms are not viable they should be allowed to go to the wall." Not sure I agree with that Rag "Viable" means profitable in the world we live in, which doesn't mean 'necessary' Food, like housing, and many other basic needs of life, have become investable commodities rather than necessities, and as such, their production depends on their making a smaller and smaller group of people ricer and richer I have become appalled at what this has done, both to the quality of our staple foods and to the planet as a whole, summarised perfectly in mass-produced, shit-tasting cotton-wool bread wrapped in plastic which sticks in the gullet of both the consumer and the planet. We ere regular visitors to Walter Pardon in North Norfolk and over the time we were, watched as the Multinationals ripped up th hedgerows, making ten fields into one in order to make it easy for their monster machines Within 10/15 years the East Wind had ripped away all the topsoil, making a once rich agricultural area into the holidaymaker-reliant desert it has become and devastating the lives of the people living there Maintaining Britain's farming heritage is not a romantic notion; it is part of keeping our planet in good health for future generations JIm

And is that not also the case with, say, the steel industry Stanron? If they maintain the population in a way the government seems desirable, then supporting them makes sense and they can be considered viable. Or do you, as many of your party do, believe that maintaining the countryside is more desirable than helping people?

Well in case you didn't get it, my answer questioned your use of the word 'viable'. If they maintain landscape in a way the Government deems desirable, then supporting them makes sense and they can be considered viable.

Odd, then, that the farmers who get paid by far the most in subsidies are the multimillionaire barley barons

Not really. the average farm size (94.7 ha) is nearly six times higher than the EU average (16.1 ha) But according to Saville's(2016)the average farm size(combinable crops) is just over 300 hectares. 30% of the direct payment allocation, paid per hectare, is linked to three environmentally-friendly farming practices: crop diversification, maintaining permanent grassland and dedicating 5 % of arable land to environmentally friendly measures (so-called 'ecological focus areas'). England has applied a basic payment at a flat rate according to three different types of land (defined as 'non-severely disadvantaged areas','lowlands & severely disadvantaged areas' and 'upland,other moorland and moorland'); The more land you have the more dosh you get but arable farms, as explained. are larger and require greater capitilization to operate. With sheep all you need is fencing (unless heft)and a dog or two. A sheep costs nominally £100, a combine £125,000. There is also far more financial risk in arable farming.

BREXIT THREAT TO REFINERIES CONFIRMED Tusk says those opposing the Backstop are supporting a hard border He poined out that the British Parliament voted for the Backstop and Boris Johnson supported it Boris sulks and skulks away Jim Carroll

"A lot of payments are for maintaining the landscape in a state suitable for tourism. Sheep farmers can't make money for wool and not all that much for meat but the sheep gaze the hills and make them look pretty."

Odd, then, that the farmers who get paid by far the most in subsidies are the multimillionaire barley barons in lowland England who have turned vast tracts of countryside into dismal, wildlife-free monoculture deserts...

'Laissez-faire' The policy that turned a Famine into a holocaust in 19th century Ireland Taking Boris as an example, for the Tories 'less government' seems to mean the dictatorship of having one man in charge and a parliament with no say in the running of the country Haven't they dried that ELSEWHERE ? Jim Carroll

"Perhaps that's why the UK Lefties are so keen on it." Fre Russia - now the most unequal of European State, and the most dangerous since Nazism, is a great exampleof Western freedom and democracy - innit ?AS FOR ARMS SALESMOST NOTABLY Jim Carroll